date

24 April 1807 A5 5 Letter V
24 April 1807

A5 5

Letter V

Inadequate compensation

3. Appeal vice Advocation

3. The analysis of this remedy is not yet compleat.

A remedy against delay, it is in the like proportion a remedy against expence: observe then the application of it. It is not intended for any thing better than a makeshift. Against misdecision it is not regarded as affording a security equal to that which is afforded at present by the regular and established mode: if it were, that existing mode would be abrogated compleatly, and this new one compleatly substituted in the room of it. It being a principle of the technical system that the security against misdecision is in the direct ratio of delay, vexation and expence, this, like the institution of the Small Debt Courts, and every other institution that either affords or promises diminution of fabricated delay sacrifices (so it is understood) a portion of the security against delay, with those its et ceteras, for the purchase of a proportionable quantity of security against, or exemption from, inconvenience in those other shapes.

Now then, the less the value at stake - the sum for example in demand in any case - the less the mischief of misdecision is in that case: the less therefore is the value of that sacrifice which is made when security against misdecision is bartered for exemption from that other mass of inconvenience. It is on this principle that where the value in demand is no more than £5, the undilatory procedure pursued in the Small Debt Courts is tolerated: when the value has risen to £5,1. the mischief of misdecision has then swollen to such a magnitude, that the security against it afforded by the dilatory system of procedure is too great a price to be paid for the exemption for the extra-delay with its appendages: it is refused accordingly.
Similar Items
  • Title: [24 April 1807 A7 7 Letter V]
    Description: 24 April 1807

    A7 7

    Letter V

    Inadequate compensation

    3. Appeal vice Advocation

    Sometimes I could almost fancy that the object of this provision - I mean always the professed object - was to gain in point of security against misdecision: thinking at the same time to gain or to lose (for I protest I can not say which) in point of exemption from delay. For here a power is given to the Court - (a power though not accompanied with obligation) to employ the new and favourite security against misdecision (that I presume is the use or at least one use of it) Jury-trial.

    Permitt me now then my Lord to close the enquiry by one question: if security against misdecision is gained without any per contrà increase in the quantity of delay, security is gained in those causes above £50 value - those causes of unlimited importance, so that the security against misdecision is absolutely obtained gratis, why refuse it to the causes under £50 value, to the cases of such comparatively small importance, so many of which are by the enormity of the price which, in the shape of delay, vexation and expence, is put upon the commodity, sold under the name of justice, absolutely precluded from all chance of it.

    But if by the proposed substitution of the mode by appeal to the mode by advocation or suspension no advantage is expected to be gained in the shape of exemption from delay and so forth, then where is the remedy provided by this Bill against the mischief the enormity of which is so flagrant and so notorious?
  • Title: [26 Oct 1807 Eldons Bill '.11]
    Description: 26 Oct 1807

    Eldons Bill

    '.11

    Procedure the System

    What makes the example so much the more instructive /richer/ in instruction is that the same Courts which afford /present/ the spectacle of diversity of procedure, and of the mischiefs flowing from it, present the example of competition, and of the minuteness of the advantages, if any that have been derived from it.

    If amongst them any such contention had ever prevailed as which should do most for furthering the ends of justice they would long ago have arrived all of them at that simplicity that undilatory unvexatious unexpensive and at the same time /but the more/ efficient simplicity which has all along characterised the system /method/ of the Small Debt Courts, the Courts of Justices of the Peace sitting out of the Sessions[?] and the other Courts of Natural Procedure: they would long have arrived at it /that goal/, or rather they never would have swerved from it: so that /insomuch/ unexpensiveness, unvexatiousness, and so far as depended upon the system undilatoriness, being in those /these/ high Courts as in the other petty Courts in all of them alike at the pitch of perfection, the only object of contention would have been as between individuals and individuals, on each individual occasion, which Judge or set of Judges should by staving off the time for decision produce least factitious delay, be most sincerely anxious to save the suitors on both sides from all unnecessary expense [...?] [...?] most effectual that by that the operation of justice no unnecessary vexation be inflicted either on the suitors on either side or on third persons, ad be most solicitously and successively attentive to avoid doing /lending his hand to/ any of those diversified injuries to which the people in the character of suitors are subjected by erroneous decisions /misdecision/ decisions and denial of justice /to the prejudice either of the plaintiff or of the defendant's side/.
  • Title: [27 Dec r 1806 Scotch Reform To L d]
    Description: 27 Dec r 1806

    Scotch Reform To L d Grenville (4

    Resolut. 15

    Extracts

    My Lord, in the Small Debt Courts (the only Courts in SCotland to which I can present myself to apply the denomination /appellation/ of seats of justice, recognizing in all the others the indisputable title to the appellation of seats of judicature) in the Small Debt Courts (if my expertation[?] be correct) it will be found impossible either to diminish or to abolish or t diminish Extracts, though for a somewhat different reason, viz. that there will be found nothing to extract.

    Therefore /Now then/ there being neither Interlocutors, nor defence, nor Summons or Petition to extract when in every one of these suits of truth and honesty Judgment has been given in a demand of debt for so many balls of oats value ,5, it will not enable the author of this[?] part of the Reform to demonstrate the necessity of all these extractions with their reserved et ceteras in a [...?] reach[?] on the like sum for the same number of bills of the same sort of grain in the case where the value of their Bill have happened to rise to high as to ,5:1. Not that should their [...?], instead of less than ,.5.1. they should have cost him ,9.19 a Scotchman, if he be honsetly advised and at the same time master of his temper wil think of demanding for them more than ,5, considering when it is that ,5 is to be had without begging, and when it is the ,9.19 would be to be had, if a man could get it /afford to but it/:

    afford to pay for it.